“Law Master’s Publication”

(Character when relevant)

Prof. S. D. Bhosale

(..11..)

Character When Relevant (S. 52 to 55)

QUESTION BANK

1. Explain when a character becomes relevant and irrelevant as per the Indian

Evidence Act.

2. What is meant by character? When can evidence of bad character be given in

criminal cases?

SHORT NOTES

Character when relevant.

SYNOPSIS

Introduction: -

II.

Relevancy of Character in Civil Cases (S.52 and 55): -

Exceptions: -

1)When the character is in issue: -

2)Affect the amount of damage (S.55): -

3)When otherwise relevant: -

III.

Relevancy of character in Civil Case (Ss.3 & 54): -

Introduction: -

According to Webster, ‘Character’ is a combination of peculiar qualities

impressed by nature or developed by a person's habit, which distinguishes him

“Law Master’s Publication”

(Character when relevant)

Prof. S. D. Bhosale

from others.

S.55, in its explanation, provides that ‘Character’ in this topic includes both

‘reputation and disposition’.

‘Reputation’ means what others think of a person and is constituted by public

opinion. The word ‘Disposition’ means ‘the witness’s individual opinion of a

person's character'. Under English Law, a character means reputation and not

disposition. Similarly, the evidence of ‘reputation’ differs from that of rumour. The

evidence as to rumour is not admissible because it is hearsay.

Evidence of character relates either (a) to the character of witnesses or (b) to

the character of parties. The witness's character affects his credit and is always

material as it helps the Court to conclude whether his evidence should be treated

as trustworthy or not? In this topic, we study the 'character' of a party to the suit or

in a criminal trial and their relevance.

II.

Relevancy of Character in Civil Cases (S.52 and 55): -

S.52 states that, in civil cases, evidence of the character of any party to the

suit to prove the probability or improbability of any conduct imputed to him (party

to the suit) is irrelevant.

Thus, if a person is charged with a breach of contract, he cannot give

evidence of the fact that his character and conduct have been such that he could

not have been guilty of breach of contract. Similarly, the opposite party cannot

give evidence that his character and reputation are so bad that he must have broken

the contract.

Exceptions: -

There are some exceptions to the above rule, viz. –

1) When the character is in issue: -

As far as a character as evidence is concerned, the distinction has to be drawn

as to whether the character itself is an issue or is not itself an issue. When the

parties’ general character is an issue, whether in a civil or criminal proceeding, it

is admissible in evidence. However, when a general character is not an issue but is

tendered to support some other issues, it is not admissible in evidence.

For example, in a suit by a Hindu son to set aside an alienation made by his

father on the ground that it was for an immoral purpose, the evidence is admissible

to show that the father led an immoral life and that the money received as

consideration was spent for an immoral purpose.

2) Affect the amount of damage (S.55): -

S.55 provides that it is relevant when the character of any person is to affect

“Law Master’s Publication”

(Character when relevant)

Prof. S. D. Bhosale

the number of damages he ought to receive in suits for damages.

It further provides that evidence may be given only of the party's general

character and not particular acts.

3) When otherwise relevant: -

Evidence can always be given of facts that are not relevant to this topic but

are relevant according to any of the sections relating to Ss.6 to 55.

III. Relevancy of character in criminal proceedings (Ss. 3 and 54): -

In criminal proceedings, the fact that the person accused is of a good

character is relevant (S.53). But the evidence as to the bad character of the accused

is irrelevant under S.54. However, this has two exceptions-

1. When an accused's bad character is itself a fact in issue. E.g. in a rape case

character of the prosecutrix is always relevant. [Explanation 1 to S.54]

2. A previous conviction is relevant as evidence of bad character. [Explanation 2

to S.54]

*****